Dark Energy

Tomasello now wrecking. B should inj default. Silly. and he does.

So many mats. But overall, am liking the dashboard.

Looks like he was wrecking Tomasello. Up 11-2. Looks like bad injury (maybe - lots of bad looks on face).

I wonder if Dake has been able to handle Brooks. Makes him confident regarding his 86kg ability. Anyone willing to dish on Dake / Brooks live goes in the room?

Did you mean 157 in 2019 was more chalk? Thinking so. good stuff

PSU #1. Curious, why is PJ #1 and Blaze #2? Both are animals. No slight meant. Just curious. Seems like Blaze has beaten more big guns. No?

I figure Taylor is someone that really knows Dake’s style, strengths, and weaknesses. This is a big coaching challenge for him. Really wish I could hear his advice for Zahid.

What the?!?!?! Really? Seems crazy. Why not go 79kg. Build body up. Then go 86kg if that is what is really desired for Olympics. If Dake is able to beat the field here at 86kg, this year, I’ll be even more in awe. Part of me wants it to not occur because I want to have more faith in our depth. But part of me is like, hell yes!! But again, why not give time for body to grow / bulk? Or is he simply never going to actually get to 86kg?

Well, what was the announcement?

Wait, what? A coach is seeking to market his program and team as being distinct from others, with qualities some wrestlers may prefer, using facts? How dare he do that!!!

So a team with one super good wrestler, just one, with others being below average for d1, would have a high chance of getting to national duals. Seems like something needs to change on qualification. Something that promotes team strength. Dual strength. Vs having an outlier or two. Still want to foster objectivity though. So metric based would be good. They use metrics to help ID the NCAA individual championship field. Perhaps could use similar metrics to evaluate a full team. Use that to help determine entrants.

It is a good Q. Like others said, if from outside school and not a scholarship, taxable. Now, what should it be going forward? Seems like all should be taxable including ‘scholarship’ since that is now just a thin / sham cover for being paid for a service that is important to the university … just like other employees. Seems like they should be considered professional athletes being paid by the school. Let’s not kid ourselves. At least for those schools that sign into the revenue share model. It is revenue share after all.

Good. Too many transfers. Goes for US guys too. Let the actual people living in, and being raised by the nation and its people, be its representatives in sport. Mercenaries not wanted. The win at all costs culture permeating sport is a shame. It is sport.

I’m confused. What is the topic? They are nearly like? Seems like a weird topic.

Not feeling knowledgeable enough to cast an informed vote.

And who is being dismissive? ‘Slightly more realistic’. … ok. I’ve already addressed the point above. We view things differently, and that is ok.

I get that there are open questions on logistics. But I do believe that if there was a desire to change, it would be figured out. This really isn’t rocket science. Solutions vary from one to two centralized locations to weigh in, at the mat itself, or something in between. I have faith that if we wanted to change, we’d figure this out. Many on here must think it is impossible to land a rocket vertically. I have faith in human ingenuity.

And the tactic of attacking / minimizing the person so as to cast aspersions on the question and/or opinion is well known … and a pity. Common now.

The debate has been had here before. On logistics …. Calibrate scales before competition. Each scale is official at each mat. Time comes to weigh shortly before match. Get weighed. Done. Do not get to walk around and scale ‘shop.’ Easy rule. Will there be more forfeits early on? Yes. Will they drop significantly as the rule change is digested? Yes. Will there more at equilibrium than there are today? I don’t know. What about a scale being off by a little bit? I bet a process could be worked out. That said, we deal with ref judgment calls on points. Score table stopping clock either precisely at whistle or near it. OOB calls. Stalling calls. Precise or imprecise start and stop times for injury time, recovery time and blood time. None are scientifically 100% accurate. A scale being off by 0.1 lbs is a risk but like most else there are ways to avoid getting hit by that risk.

@pmilk - thanks for the long post and details. Sounds like some great discipline and some adults that really cared. Even then, you mentioned (implied?) that you still did some not allowed activity (plastics / sauna). Expecting also with some degree of oversight. I would agree that reducing weight smartly isn’t the black eye. It’s the dumb approaches, the dumb people, the horror stories that kids tell, what the parents see, what the friends see and hear. I’ve been around the sport for a while. There are many (many many) true a$$hole parents (and some coaches) that live vicariously through the kids and put ridiculous pressure on them. They demand ridiculous actions and treat them like crap if they don’t comply. Weight cutting is an example category for this. I would suggest that if there was a way to get rid of or otherwise ‘fix’ this cancer in the community, weight cutting wouldn’t be such a black eye. I figure it is very hard to do this though. Thus my preference to go to mat side weight ins. i believe weight management would STILL be important. All that you mentioned would still be helpful. But the extremes will be removed as people VERY quickly realize that big cuts are counter productive to success on mat.

So you feel, upon reflection, those are the only two possibilities. Interesting.

While I disagree with @Winners Circle on the character building value of significant weight cutting, I would point out that if scales were mat side, there would still be a need for disciplined weight management and some would likely still seek to lose weight. Health, nutrition, and discipline would all remain key areas of focus.

He made it abundantly clear that he did not get along with ‘staff.’ He made comments that this was basically from the start of his tenure of Ok State. Made a comment that he pushed on the issue, tried to resolve it, but it got to point where had to focus on just being professional at work. Could not get better than that. He had meeting with David Taylor on Zoom after NCAAs, so he could read Taylor’s face and, in the end, knew it was over. Guy gave A TON of detail. Yes, he did not name the person (people?) and didn’t air out the specifics of the disputes / disagreements. But he gave more than 99%.

Ok. Glad we are clear. If it’s insignificant than there would not be any challenge. No hard work. No discipline. The weight loss must be significant enough to drive the character building you believe can be had. Hoping that is a completely fair way of saying what you intend.

So you feel reducing the amount of weight cutting would harm the sport. You feel having weight cutting be a key and important part of the sport, is a plus. You feel — Without significant weight cutting being part of the experience, kids would generally be worse off from a character and long term capability perspective. And their mental and physical health will be worse off. Fascinating. I disagree 100% on all counts.